PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Should the Chiefs have drafted Sedrick Ellis over Dorsey?


Deberg_1990
09-10-2010, 06:54 PM
Just comparing the stats......seems as though Ellis has been more a force so far than Dorsey.....thoughts?


Ellis:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/8785/career;_ylt=AroaDwfFJEQq5prBrFaf8t7.uLYF


Dorsey:


http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/8782/career;_ylt=AroaDwfFJEQq5prBrFaf8t7.uLYF

DaKCMan AP
09-10-2010, 06:54 PM
No.

bevischief
09-10-2010, 06:58 PM
:popcorn:

Bwana
09-10-2010, 07:03 PM
Oh for fuck sake. :spock:

SNR
09-10-2010, 07:08 PM
Herm and Carl could not have seen the team jamming a square peg into a round hole by converting to the 3-4 a year after drafting Dorsey. It was absolutely the right pick at the time. Matt Ryan was gone already. Dorsey was near the top of everybody's draft boards. It was absolutely the right call.

bevischief
09-10-2010, 07:08 PM
Oh for **** sake. :spock:

My take...

Gonzo
09-10-2010, 07:11 PM
Herm and Carl could not have seen the team jamming a square peg into a round hole by converting to the 3-4 a year after drafting Dorsey. It was absolutely the right pick at the time. Matt Ryan was gone already. Dorsey was near the top of everybody's draft boards. It was absolutely the right call.

Pretty much this. I still think he's going to do well. He's a natural talent and if he can't do the 3-4, they'll trade him to a team that can utilize him correctly for a decent pick or player.
JMO
Posted via Mobile Device

PGM
09-10-2010, 07:16 PM
Really????

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-10-2010, 07:19 PM
It would have been a better pick had we been in a 3-4, because people believe that Ellis can man the 0 technique in a 3-4.

That said, Dorsey was clearly a superior prospect to Ellis coming out, and you can't blame Carl, Herm, and Kuharich on Pioli's insistence that we marginalize the only talented player in our front 7 to chase a trend that is ill-suited to his talents.

Consistent1
09-10-2010, 07:20 PM
It just wouldn't be Chiefs Planet without shit like this. At least we got Tyson Jackson to bolster the D-Line. Who will be the first to say Dorsey for Stafford and three firsts because Detroit wants him in this thread?

Ebolapox
09-10-2010, 07:36 PM
it's already been said: dorsey was the OBVIOUS pick.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-10-2010, 07:40 PM
This does raise an interesting point about the draft.

If you draft the obvious selection at a certain slot and he busts, it's hard to blame the GM for making that pick because he was the consensus selection at that spot. That is the way the draft falls at times. However, when you reach to take someone, or you pass a superior prospect up and they bust, it's far worse.

If Oher busts for the Ravens (obviously not happening) it's not nearly as bad as if Pettigrew does for the Lions.

That's one of the things that made the Jackson pick so bad. It's not that he hasn't lived up to his draft position, as Dorsey really hasn't either yet, it's that he is looking like both a reach and a bust.

Pablo
09-10-2010, 07:40 PM
No.

Anyone that says yes is a fucking revisionist history cocksucker and deserves to have their balls pulled through their asshole.

Dorsey was THE OBVIOUS PICK.

DJ was THE OBVIOUS PICK.

Berry was THE OBVIOUS PICK.

I know it's fun to play what if and be arm-chair GM's; but this isn't the case to dispute.

mcaj22
09-10-2010, 07:46 PM
let's see if I can guess the next "Should the Chiefs have drafted" thread....


Jon Beason over Dwayne Bowe?

ooo that's a goodie!

Chief Chief
09-10-2010, 08:03 PM
Take Ellis instead of Dorsey??

And ruin CP's reputation directly in the process??

RUFKM???

milkman
09-10-2010, 08:04 PM
Should the Chiefs have drafted Joe Montana instead of Mike Bell?

Chief3188
09-10-2010, 08:10 PM
What we should have done is that trade with New Orleans. They offered their 1st round pick (#10) and their 7th round pick plus their 1st round pick for 09 to move up 5 spots to grab Dorsey.

Outside of a shot at a premier QB ( In which Matt Ryan was already taken ) you don't turn down an offer like that for an unproven player. We could have drafted Clady at #10 and taken whoever else fit our roster at the next 1st round pick and then we would have had 2 1st round picks in the 09 draft.

I like Dorsey and still have hope that he can make that leap into at least a good player but there are many other players from that draft I would have rather had in the 1st round.

Ebolapox
09-10-2010, 08:14 PM
What we should have done is that trade with New Orleans. They offered their 1st round pick (#10) and their 7th round pick plus their 1st round pick for 09 to move up 5 spots to grab Dorsey.

Outside of a shot at a premier QB ( In which Matt Ryan was already taken ) you don't turn down an offer like that for an unproven player. We could have drafted Clady at #10 and taken whoever else fit our roster at the next 1st round pick and then we would have had 2 1st round picks in the 09 draft.

I like Dorsey and still have hope that he can make that leap into at least a good player but there are many other players from that draft I would have rather had in the 1st round.

the supposed trade that the saints offered is, and has always, been pure speculation that has NEVER been substantiated. I'm with you: you take it. but there's no evidence that it ever happened.

I'm open to a link that proves it, though.

Deberg_1990
09-10-2010, 08:16 PM
If you draft the obvious selection at a certain slot and he busts, it's hard to blame the GM for making that pick because he was the consensus selection at that spot

Ryan Sims would fall into this category?

Mecca
09-10-2010, 08:16 PM
Sure in hindsight since Ellis fits the 3-4 much better but we didn't know we'd hire a new regime that would shoehorn in an entirely new scheme.

I still to this day believe there is a such thing as thinking you are to smart for your job. When if you'd just make the obvious pick/choice you'd do fine but some guys are so bent on showing how brilliant they are they have to take assface mcbumblefuck from shithole state to try to prove some point. There's something to be said for the teams that draft well because they take the obvious players. Our best draft of the last decade was the draft where we took obvious players.

Also when you understand positional value of todays NFL, DJ wasn't the obvious pick.

Mecca
09-10-2010, 08:18 PM
Ryan Sims would fall into this category?

That was a pick of teams being retarded, John Henderson was clearly the best DT that year but he got downgrade for "being to tall".

tk13
09-10-2010, 08:21 PM
Bunch of revisionist history, this all is. If I could go back and pick the lottery numbers right from three nights ago, I'd be rich. Anyone who tries to make a know-it-all argument using hindsight should be punched in the face with a chainsaw. End of story.

Deberg_1990
09-10-2010, 08:21 PM
Sure in hindsight since Ellis fits the 3-4 much better but we didn't know we'd hire a new regime that would shoehorn in an entirely new scheme.

I still to this day believe there is a such thing as thinking you are to smart for your job. When if you'd just make the obvious pick/choice you'd do fine but some guys are so bent on showing how brilliant they are they have to take assface mcbumble**** from shithole state to try to prove some point. There's something to be said for the teams that draft well because they take the obvious players. Our best draft of the last decade was the draft where we took obvious players.

Also when you understand positional value of todays NFL, DJ wasn't the obvious pick.

im assuming you are alluding to the Chiefs 09 pick of Jackson?

I think if the Chiefs had a do-over, id want them to take Crabtree there....but the 09 1st round is looking pretty weak overall.

Mecca
09-10-2010, 08:24 PM
im assuming you are alluding to the Chiefs 09 pick of Jackson?

I think if the Chiefs had a do-over, id want them to take Crabtree there....but the 09 1st round is looking pretty weak overall.

Is the Cassel move made or not?

If it is I considered BJ Raji the obvious pick.

Chief3188
09-10-2010, 08:28 PM
the supposed trade that the saints offered is, and has always, been pure speculation that has NEVER been substantiated. I'm with you: you take it. but there's no evidence that it ever happened.

I'm open to a link that proves it, though.

Well aside from the announcers from the coverage of the draft on NFL Network mentioning it down to the specifics of the deal, it makes too much sense. I live in New Orleans. They love Dorsey here and they drafted a DT with their pick. That would have sparked ticket sales for them etc....

Granted we don't for sure what was offered but if that is what they offered my point still stands.

Mecca
09-10-2010, 08:30 PM
Many people had Dorsey rated at the best player in that draft, it isn't that regime's or his fault that he's playing out of position now.

Deberg_1990
09-10-2010, 08:32 PM
Should the Chiefs have drafted Joe Montana instead of Mike Bell?

Yes

Chief3188
09-10-2010, 08:35 PM
Many people had Dorsey rated at the best player in that draft, it isn't that regime's or his fault that he's playing out of position now.

I agree but if that deal was offered by the Saints I do think they are at fault for not taking that ridiculous deal. Anybody outside of possible franchise QB, you should take a deal for if offered something outlandish like that as they are unproven players.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-10-2010, 09:13 PM
Ryan Sims would fall into this category?

Yup. It's not like there weren't other teams falling over themselves to take him.

Now, if we had ran up to the podium after trading with Dallas to take Larry Tripplett, it would have been unconscionably awful.

The reason why Trezelle Jenkins was such a horrible pick is because everyone thought he was a 4th-5th rounder, we took him in the 1st, and he busted. It was an indefensible pick at the time only made worse when you look at the talent that was passed up that not only turned out better, but was seen as better at the time.

RippedmyFlesh
09-10-2010, 09:18 PM
Sure in hindsight since Ellis fits the 3-4 much better but we didn't know we'd hire a new regime that would shoehorn in an entirely new scheme.

I still to this day believe there is a such thing as thinking you are to smart for your job. When if you'd just make the obvious pick/choice you'd do fine but some guys are so bent on showing how brilliant they are they have to take assface mcbumblefuck from shithole state to try to prove some point. There's something to be said for the teams that draft well because they take the obvious players. Our best draft of the last decade was the draft where we took obvious players.

Also when you understand positional value of todays NFL, DJ wasn't the obvious pick.
That is the thing I hated the most about the peterson era.He did that all the time.

Jerm
09-10-2010, 09:19 PM
I've always been curious as to what the Chiefs would've done had Ryan been there at #5.

Of course the consensus would've been take him but I just wonder how high up on their board he was.

DaneMcCloud
09-10-2010, 09:23 PM
No.

Anyone that says yes is a fucking revisionist history cocksucker and deserves to have their balls pulled through their asshole.

Dorsey was THE OBVIOUS PICK.

DJ was THE OBVIOUS PICK.

Berry was THE OBVIOUS PICK.

I know it's fun to play what if and be arm-chair GM's; but this isn't the case to dispute.

RODGERS was the obvious pick.

Al and Dick didn't want to hurt Green's feelings.

Don't you remember Trent Green almost crying on ESPN when fucking Brodie Croyle was chosen in 2006?

And FTR, I was no fan of the Dorsey selection because he was coming off an injury that had many people at odds as to whether or not he'd become an productive NFL player.

Jilly
09-10-2010, 09:26 PM
It might have been said, but he'd be a more obvious choice for a 3-4, right? But, draft best player, not for slots.....so Dorsey was the better move.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-10-2010, 09:26 PM
That is the thing I hated the most about the peterson era.He did that all the time.

Tyson Jackson, Colin Brown, or Jake O'Connell ring a bell?

Jerm
09-10-2010, 09:26 PM
The Rodgers non selection was an absolute sham...we somehow lucked into him falling to us and then pass on him.

:facepalm: = Me when that happened

Mecca
09-10-2010, 09:27 PM
I've always been curious as to what the Chiefs would've done had Ryan been there at #5.

Of course the consensus would've been take him but I just wonder how high up on their board he was.

I doubt they'd have taken him, they were still selling the Brodie Croyle bullshit then. Hell a lot of this forum ate it up and said we couldn't take Ryan, I remember those debates.

Jerm
09-10-2010, 09:29 PM
I doubt they'd have taken him, they were still selling the Brodie Croyle bullshit then. Hell a lot of this forum ate it up and said we couldn't take Ryan, I remember those debates.

I tend to agree. I could very easily see them auctioning that pick off and trading back in that scenario.

RedThat
09-10-2010, 09:30 PM
RODGERS was the obvious pick.

Al and Dick didn't want to hurt Green's feelings.

Don't you remember Trent Green almost crying on ESPN when ****ing Brodie Croyle was chosen in 2006?

And FTR, I was no fan of the Dorsey selection because he was coming off an injury that had many people at odds as to whether or not he'd become an productive NFL player.

Yeah I remember Dorsey in college. Dude was a warrior. He used to play through pain and do it at a high level too. It was amazing watching him at work.

He got a bit of flack because of injuries. The injuries I thought were a bit overlooked, and many of the so-called experts felt he would overcome the injuries or play through them because thats the type of character he was. But yeah no doubt he was the consensus pick at the time since he was the most polished DT coming out.

DaneMcCloud
09-10-2010, 09:50 PM
He got a bit of flack because of injuries. The injuries I thought were a bit overlooked, and many of the so-called experts felt he would overcome the injuries or play through them because thats the type of character he was. But yeah no doubt he was the consensus pick at the time since he was the most polished DT coming out.

Perfect example of need over BPA

chiefscafan
09-10-2010, 11:04 PM
Ok I looked into this if we had made the trade and gotten Ellis. 7th round we could have taken the bell kid from buffalo for RT in the 7th.

In 2009 we could have taken Cushing giving us

Jackson. Ellis. Gillberry
Hali vrabel. Johnson. Cushing
flowers. Carr
Lewis
Berry

draft picks

2008

Ellis and Albert flowers carr etc

2009

Jackson and Cushing etc

2010

berry Lewis arenas mccluster etc

I guess it would have been better to pull that deal but I still like Dorsey.

L.A. Chieffan
09-10-2010, 11:11 PM
Yeah Dorsey was pretty much the BPA on anybodys draft board, so no, it wasnt a bad pick a the time.

Jackson on the other hand...

Marcellus
09-10-2010, 11:42 PM
Dorsey was considered to not only the best defensive player in the draft but possibly the #1 player overall in the draft so taking him at 5 was not close to being a stretch.

B_Ambuehl
09-11-2010, 01:15 AM
We were also offered an '08 2nd round pick and another '09 first rounder that year in a trade with Carolina for our 17. They traded up to get Otah.

And there's no debating that one. Carolinas GM has an interview online somewhere where he spelled out the details of the offer. They called the Chiefs and a couple of other teams and we turned it down before philly finally accepted.

So we potentially could've had the #10 pick in '08 with an extra 2nd in '08 and 2 extra firsts in '09. We probably woulda taken a tackle at #10 along with Flowers and someone else in round 2.

That '09 draft coulda been something special with 3 first round picks. Instead we're left with Tyson jackson and Matt Cassell.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-11-2010, 01:43 AM
At some point, you've gotta stand pat and take a player. Glenn Dorsey was a once-in-a-decade prospect. He was roundly viewed as the best DT since Sapp to enter the draft.

You don't trade out of that spot. Also, if you have a guy who looks like a franchise LT staring you in the face in the middle of the first round, you take him if you're a rebuilding team.

Do you think Bill Parcells is happy he traded down so he could pass up Steven Jackson and take Julius Jones?

Deberg_1990
09-11-2010, 06:40 AM
At some point, you've gotta stand pat and take a player. Glenn Dorsey was a once-in-a-decade prospect. He was roundly viewed as the best DT since Sapp to enter the draft.

You don't trade out of that spot. Also, if you have a guy who looks like a franchise LT staring you in the face in the middle of the first round, you take him if you're a rebuilding team.

Do you think Bill Parcells is happy he traded down so he could pass up Steven Jackson and take Julius Jones?

Yea i agree....sometimes all the trading down doesnt make alot of sense. All you end up with is alot of marginal talent guys who can play, but you give up high impact guys.

Dave Lane
09-11-2010, 07:35 AM
That was a pick of teams being retarded, John Henderson was clearly the best DT that year but he got downgrade for "being to tall".

I think there were back issues that scared people along with the height issue.

Chiefnj2
09-11-2010, 07:49 AM
I think there were back issues that scared people along with the height issue.

Back isues, plus his senior year productivity dropped.

B_Ambuehl
09-11-2010, 11:35 AM
I think I was the only one at the time who wasn't on board with the Dorsey pick at the time

http://m.chiefsplanet.com/showthread.php?t=183824&page=5

If you think about it though there were several reasons for being skeptical:

1. He's from LSU and fat guys from the deep south bust at an EXTREMELY high level.

2. He had already dealt with an unadvertised weight/conditioning problem as an underclassman which got him in the doghouse with the coaching staff.

3. He didn't play the way he was advertised as playing. He was advertised as Warren Sapp and a sack artist but anyone who watched his game film that year could see Dorsey wasn't a penetrator and wasn't asked to play as a penetrator. He was a decent run stopper but undersized for that type of player.

4. The main thing we needed was someone who could pressure the QB to replace Jared Allen.

5. We had spent 2nd and 3rd round picks on DTs the year before and had nothing at defensive end. Tank Tyler was a virtual twin of Dorsey's playing style. The year he and Dorsey played together Tank was the better player.

In the end Dorsey has mainly proved to be a product of false expectations.

For this football team (even under different leadership) to turn around and make the exact same mistake the following year with Tyson Jackson is beyond forgiveable. What were the red flags with T-jack?

1. He's from LSU and fat guys from the deep south bust at an EXTREMELY high level.

2. He didn't play the way he was advertised as playing. He was advertised as a "can't miss" 5 technique but all he'd ever played had been a 4-3 defense end role. 4-3 DEs do not typically switch to down lineman in a 3-4 and evaluating/projecting them as such is something you don't want to gamble a top 5 pick on .

3. The main thing we needed was someone who could clog the middle of the 3-4 defense (BJ Raji anyone?)

5. 3-4 DEs are the easiest spot in a 3-4 to get a serviceable player. We had spent a top 5 pick the year before on defensive end and had NOTHING at nose tackle and nothing at many other positions.

In the end T-jack has too proven to be a product of false expectations.

Sully
09-11-2010, 12:11 PM
What about his clone, Trevor Laws?

Saccopoo
09-11-2010, 01:02 PM
You don't trade out of that spot. Also, if you have a guy who looks like a franchise LT staring you in the face in the middle of the first round, you take him if you're a rebuilding team.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2010/football/nfl/08/24/seahawks.okung.ap/russell-okung-story-getty.jpg

DaneMcCloud
09-11-2010, 06:47 PM
I think I was the only one at the time who wasn't on board with the Dorsey pick at the time

http://m.chiefsplanet.com/showthread.php?t=183824&page=5



Thanks for that link.

Proof that I'm not always negative when it comes to the Chiefs and their drafts.

Tribal Warfare
09-11-2010, 07:21 PM
That was a pick of teams being retarded, John Henderson was clearly the best DT that year but he got downgrade for "being to tall".

back injuries too